THE former head of Scotland's crime fighting agency has criticised the lack of accountability and governance proposed for Scotland's new single police force.
Graeme Pearson, Labour MSP and former head of the Scottish Crime and Drug Enforcement Agency, has warned the legislation going through Parliament to amalgamate the country's eight police forces shows a worrying lack of "open and positive public scrutiny".
It follows the criticism of Les Gray, the outgoing head of the Scottish Police Federation (SPF), who, earlier this week, warned against the proposed timetable to appoint the new chief constable in January 2013 – before the single force begins on April 1.
Mr Gray, who retired on Sunday as chairman of the SPF, said the appointment of the new chief needs to take place by the autumn of 2011 and criticised the current lack of answers about governance and VAT.
In a letter to The Herald, Mr Pearson warned that proposals for the new single police force are "undemocratic" and lacking in accountability. He said: "Across Scotland we have the opportunity now to deliver a proper public scrutiny of the oversight of policing at national level and accountability at the local level.
"But the SNP Government seem determined to maintain a service authority arrangement largely chosen by the minister, with a convener and chief constable reporting via civil servants to the minister before eventually Parliament's involvement. This is not a healthy situation for the future.
"A single Scottish police force will be a powerful body to be managed without an open and positive public scrutiny. What the civil servants have delivered is a model created to control and influence, particularly in relation to budget and policy. In a model maintained by, and on behalf of, government there is little encouragement to challenge wrong thinking or reveal wrong doing.
"These proposals are undemocratic, designed for the comfort of the executive at a cost in terms of parliamentary scrutiny. They are therefore debilitating to genuine accountability."
Police chiefs have already warned the new police authority will be liable to pay VAT of at least £22 million a year and calls have been made for a solution to the issue.
In his comments earlier this week, Mr Gray warned of the "danger" of the slow pace of plans to appoint the chief constable of Scotland's new single force, saying unresolved issues will impact on the service. "The biggest concern is the delay in appointing a new chief," he said. "There is a perception the reforms don't seem to be getting anywhere fast. We at least need to have a structure and we certainly need a chief constable in place long before the proposed deadline.
"It's no secret we have criticised the apparent lack of communication. Officers at all levels just want to know what is happening, whether they will have to move all over the country and what the structures will be."
A Scottish Government spokeswoman said: "Our plans for police reform have been informed by two consultations and more than a year of regular and sustained engagement with police, ACPOS, boards, local authorities, political parties and others.
"All criminal investigations will continue to be independently directed by the Lord Advocate and Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service. The Police Investigations and Review Commissioner will ensure that, where necessary, investigations of the police are carried out by an independent body.
"The Bill will follow the standard Parliamentary timetable and our plans will ensure the new Police Service of Scotland is sub-ject to more formal and routine scrutiny by Parliament than the current eight forces. Meanwhile, the appointment of SPA members will be regulated by the Public Appointments Commissioner."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article